On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:09:36 +0200
Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 10:07:42AM +0200, Nicolas George wrote:
> > Le sextidi 26 vendémiaire, an CCXXV, Michael Niedermayer a écrit :  
> > > probably, yes  
> > 
> > I would have said exactly the opposite. It is nothing but a waste of time
> > and a pollution of the history.  
> My idea here is to maximize the number of developers
> And if in cases where one doesnt really care much either way and
> someone else seems caring more one says, "ok" that may result in a happy
> new contributor.
> Saying "no" is more likely to turn someone away.
> and again, it doesnt really matter if the , is there after a
> final sentinel /count entry as no next field would ever be added

Are you kidding me. Patches should be judged on their technical merrit,
not whether you might piss someone off by rejecting it.

Rather, you'd keep someone on one's toes by giving him hope that his
patch might be accepted - and making him waste some more time on it.
Just with the result that other devs might reject the patch anyway,
which would make for a frustrating experience.

> And ATM the "," thing is not consistent either way
> git grep '_NB$' |wc
>      53     114    2123
> git grep '_NB,$' |wc
>      30      76    1499
> Making this more consistent shouldnt be a bad thing if the people who
> want it also do the work ... (and it doesnt end as some rule that
> causes future work to people not caring ...)
> [...]

That's true, but your grep has a huge number of false positives.
ffmpeg-devel mailing list

Reply via email to